National Union Fire Ins. v. Fannin

257 F. Supp. 1017, 8 Ohio Misc. 163
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio
DecidedFebruary 25, 1966
DocketCiv. No. 3209
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 257 F. Supp. 1017 (National Union Fire Ins. v. Fannin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
National Union Fire Ins. v. Fannin, 257 F. Supp. 1017, 8 Ohio Misc. 163 (S.D. Ohio 1966).

Opinion

Weinman, District Judge.

In this action, plaintiff, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. (hereinafter referred to as “National”), filed its complaint against its insured, Blaine S. Fannin, d. b. a. The Starlight Club, Doris Lamka and Harold F. Lamka. Doris Lamka and Harold F. Lamka are plaintiffs in an action in the Common Pleas Court of Greene County, Ohio (case No. 37853) against Fannin for injuries, losses and expenses resulting from an accident which occurred on September 3,1963, on the premises of Fannin. That suit seeks damages in the sum of one hundred forty-five thous- and two hundred ninety-five and no/100 ($145,295) dollars and costs. In this action, National seeks declarations that its policy No. CGL 63 10 87A, issued to Fannin on said premises, does not provide coverage to Fannin in connection with the accident involving Doris Lamka; and in connection with the action filed in the Common Pleas Court of Greene County, Ohio, that National be discharged from the responsibility to defend that action or to respond in the payment of any judgment therein rendered. It is National’s contention that Fannin has failed, as required by the conditions of the policy, to give notice of the accident, to co-operate with plaintiff and to give notice of the filing of the lawsuit in the state court.

The complaint in this action was filed on August 25, 1965, after which summonses were served on each named defendant. Since none of the defendants appeared by responsive pleading or otherwise within the time provided by law, plaintiff filed its application to the clerk to enter a default on October 28, 1965. On October 29, 1965, by direction of the court, the clerk notified each defendant that an application for entry of default had been filed, that each had not personally entered an appearance nor had any attorney entered an appearance on their behalf and that the application for default would be granted and filed [165]*165if the defendants or their attorneys did not enter an appearance within ten days from the date thereof. Before the expiration of the ten day’s period, defendants Doris Lamka and Harold Lamka filed their joint answer through their counsel, denying for lack of knowledge the allegations contained in the complaint. Defendant Fannin failed to make an appearance by himself or counsel within the time provided. On November 18, 1965, the clerk entered default against defendant Fannin for failure to plead or otherwise defend, as required by law.

The court, by reason of the issues raised by the complaint and the answers of defendants, Doris Lamka and Harold Lamka, ordered the case set for trial on December 20, 1965.

This case proceeded to trial on December 20, 1965, before the court, no jury having been demanded. Defendant Doris Lamka appeared with her counsel. Defendant Fannin was subpoenaed by counsel for defendant Doris Lamka and called to testify by said counsel; however, defendant Fannin offered no defense in his behalf.

The case was tried to the court upon the evidence, exhibits and default of defendant Fannin.

Findings of Fact

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
257 F. Supp. 1017, 8 Ohio Misc. 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-union-fire-ins-v-fannin-ohsd-1966.